Breast Cancer Screening Using Tomosynthesis in Combination With Digital Mammography
Sarah M. Friedewald,Elizabeth A. Rafferty,Stephen L. Rose,Melissa A. Durand,Donna Plecha,Julianne S. Greenberg,Mary Katherine Hayes,Debra S. Copit,Kara L. Carlson,Thomas M. Cink,Lora D. Barke,Linda N. Greer,Dave P. Miller,Emily F. Conant +13 more
TLDR
Addition of tomosynthesis to digital mammography was associated with a decrease in recall rate and an increase in cancer detection rate, and further studies are needed to assess the relationship to clinical outcomes.Abstract:
mammography + tomosynthesis; difference, 1.3 (95% CI, 0.4-2.1; P = .004); for cancer detection, 4.2 (95% CI, 3.8-4.7) with digital mammography vs 5.4 (95% CI, 4.9-6.0) with digital mammography + tomosynthesis; difference, 1.2 (95% CI, 0.8-1.6; P < .001); and for invasive cancer detection, 2.9 (95% CI, 2.5-3.2) with digital mammography vs 4.1 (95% CI, 3.7-4.5) with digital mammography + tomosynthesis; difference, 1.2 (95% CI, 0.8-1.6; P < .001). The in situ cancer detection rate was 1.4 (95% CI, 1.2-1.6) per 1000 screens with both methods. Adding tomosynthesis was associated with an increase in the positive predictive value for recall from 4.3% to 6.4% (difference, 2.1%; 95% CI, 1.7%-2.5%; P < .001) and for biopsy from 24.2% to 29.2% (difference, 5.0%; 95% CI, 3.0%-7.0%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Addition of tomosynthesis to digital mammography was associated with a decrease in recall rate and an increase in cancer detection rate. Further studies are needed to assess the relationship to clinical outcomes.read more
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Emerging Modalities in Breast Cancer Imaging
TL;DR: None have been studied by large randomized clinical trials to match the proven benefits of screening mammography; namely the reduction of mortality caused by breast cancer by nearly 30%.
Journal ArticleDOI
Comparative Effectiveness of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Breast Cancer Screening Among Women 40-64 Years Old.
Ilana B. Richman,Jessica B. Long,Jessica R. Hoag,Akhil Upneja,Regina J. Hooley,Xiao Xu,Natalia Kunst,Natalia Kunst,Jenerius A. Aminawung,Kelly A. Kyanko,Susan H. Busch,Cary P. Gross +11 more
TL;DR: In this article, the authors evaluated screening outcomes with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in a real-world cohort and to characterize the population health impact of DBT as it is widely adopted.
Journal ArticleDOI
Caracterización de cánceres de mama sintomáticos invisibles en mamografía digital y tomosíntesis: correlación radiopatológica
P. M. Aguilar Angulo,C. Romero Castellano,J. Ruiz Martín,M.P. Sánchez-Camacho González-Carrato,L.M. Cruz Hernández +4 more
TL;DR: Los carcinomas ocultos in MD y TS representaron el 4% of las lesiones detectadas en pacientes sintomaticas, fueron mayoritariamente masas, todas tuvieron diagnostico de carcinoma ductal infiltrante (con predominio del inmunofenotipo luminal) and se detectaron in mamas de densidad tipo b, c and d.
Journal ArticleDOI
Tomosynthesis as a screening tool for breast cancer: A systematic review
TL;DR: Tomosynthesis reduces some limitations of mammography at the time of screening that until recently were most often addressed by ultrasound at later work-up, and can potentially be adopted alongside mammography as a screening tool.
Journal ArticleDOI
Advances and controversies in management of breast ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)
TL;DR: In this article , the authors suggest evidence-based guidelines for proper DCIS clinical management, which should be discussed within a multidisciplinary team in order to propose the most suitable approach in clinical practice, taking into account recent scientific studies.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
American Cancer Society Guidelines for Breast Screening with MRI as an Adjunct to Mammography
Debbie Saslow,Carla Boetes,Wylie Burke,Steven E. Harms,Martin O. Leach,Constance D. Lehman,Elizabeth A. Morris,Etta D. Pisano,Mitchell D. Schnall,Stephen F. Sener,Robert A. Smith,Ellen Warner,Martin J. Yaffe,Kimberly S. Andrews,Christy A. Russell +14 more
TL;DR: There are several risk subgroups for which the available data are insufficient to recommend for or against screening, including women with a personal history of breast cancer, carcinoma in situ, atypical hyperplasia, and extremely dense breasts on mammography.
Journal ArticleDOI
Screening for Lung Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement
TL;DR: Although lung cancer screening is not an alternative to smoking cessation, the USPSTF found adequate evidence that annual screening for lung cancer with LDCT in a defined population of high-risk persons can prevent a substantial number of lung cancerrelated deaths.
Journal ArticleDOI
Diagnostic Performance of Digital versus Film Mammography for Breast-Cancer Screening
Etta D. Pisano,Constantine Gatsonis,Edward Hendrick,Martin J. Yaffe,Janet K. Baum,Suddhasatta Acharyya,Emily F. Conant,Laurie L. Fajardo,Lawrence W. Bassett,Roberta A. Jong,Murray Rebner +10 more
TL;DR: The overall diagnostic accuracy of digital and film mammography as a means of screening for breast cancer is similar, but digital mammography is more accurate in women under the age of 50 years, women with radiographically dense breasts, and premenopausal or perimenopausal women.
Journal ArticleDOI
Screening for Breast Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement
Ned Calonge,Diana B. Petitti,Thomas G. DeWitt,Allen J. Dietrich,Kimberly D. Gregory,David C. Grossman,George Isham,Michael L. LeFevre,Rosanne M. Leipzig,Lucy N. Marion,Bernadette Mazurek Melnyk,Virginia A. Moyer,Judith K. Ockene,George F. Sawaya,J. Sanford Schwartz,Timothy J Wilt,US Preventive Serv Task Force +16 more
TL;DR: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess additional benefits and harms of either digital mammography or magnetic resonance imaging instead of film mammography as screening modalities for breast cancer.
Journal ArticleDOI
Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer.
Wendie A. Berg,Jeffrey D. Blume,Jean B. Cormack,Ellen B. Mendelson,Daniel Lehrer,M. Böhm-Vélez,Etta D. Pisano,Roberta A. Jong,W. Phil Evans,Marilyn J. Morton,Mary C. Mahoney,Linda Hovanessian Larsen,Richard G. Barr,Dione M. Farria,Helga S. Marques,Karan Boparai +15 more
TL;DR: The diagnostic yield, sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy (assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) of combined mammography plus ultrasound vs mammography alone and the positive predictive value of biopsy recommendations for mammographyplus ultrasound vs Mammography alone are compared.